[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: HSC and women
> The untouchability in those days was so bad that a person
> of Sankara's intellectual calibre could not escape from
> its clutches, but the moment he realised the mistake, he
> corrected it, that is his greatness.
I know an advaitin who holds a different view. He believes that Shankara knew
the untouchable to be Shiva (or brahma-jnani if you like), but to stress the
point that nobody should be discriminated against, Shankara "staged" the
episode with Shiva.
My friend argued that Shankara was a brahma-jnani and could not have committed
such a blunder. So the only alternative was to assume that Shankara feigned
ignorance in order to "teach" the common man the right code of conduct.
> : Analysis and reasoning of the philosophies is needed before accepting
> : their truths and myths.
>
> This statement should be accepted by every seeker. I would
Some speculation:
It's difficult to say why there should be reasoning at all in any quest for
the truth.
If logic is completely renounced, can you prove that the truth cannot be
arrived at?
> consider religion as experimental and should be guided by
> your own reasoning and experience, rather than blindly
> depending on any scholar, even if he is Shankara. The works
> of the scholars can of course guide us, but using them
> blindly may be misguiding.
What is "using them blindly"? If you mean accepting the statements without
backing it up with reasoning, why believe in God at all, since such can neither
be proved nor disproved?
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Santhosh
Regards,
Kartik
